Please Register and Login to this forum to stop seeing this advertising.

Posted: Tue Mar 08, 2016 9:03 am

pards4ever

Joined: 20 Jul 2013
Posts: 135

Lafayette lacrosse can longer make excuses about the program being fully funded...Richmond has 4 scholarships ..BU has 5...and High Point 4...Marquette 3.... all top 20 teams..and all new teams...We can't make anymore excuses ...time for a coaching change

I don't know anything about Lacrosse. I have no idea if the team is well coached, and if the staff employs scheme's that maximize the talent. However, it is troubling that several brand new programs are much better than Lafayette, with apparent limited funding as well.

I watched some of the game vs. Army. I understand Army is a top team year after year, but I can say they were notably faster, more physical and more skilled. The gap was wide. Speed and skill differentials are not easily remedied, but we they were also much more physical. Army was pushing Lafayette around all afternoon, and we didn't seem to muster much in the way of fighting back. Again, I barely know what I'm talking about, and could be well off base, but this is what I observed.

Lafayette has been playing Lax at the highest level for as long as anyone, and we have virtually nothing to show for our trouble. Maybe a coaching change would help, but it hasn't in the past. We must also consider who would be doing the hiring if a coaching change were made, and this individual doesn't exactly inspire confidence in his abilities to choose a dynamic coach.

Posted: Tue Mar 08, 2016 9:39 am

seenalot

Joined: 24 Feb 2007
Posts: 1424

I do not yet think this is on Coach Ski.

But I have long said that a change at the AD position is needed if only to signal someone at the top cares, and has a plan to see that these kids have a chance at success on the field.

Lafayette lacrosse can longer make excuses about the program being fully funded...Richmond has 4 scholarships ..BU has 5...and High Point 4...Marquette 3.... all top 20 teams..and all new teams...We can't make anymore excuses ...time for a coaching change

Curious as to the source of Boston U having only 5 scholarships. It has been reported by multiple sources, including their own site, that their program will be fully funded after four years. With this being Year 3, that would mean they would be giving out 9+ scholarships at this point.

Also, according to Marquette's own press release, their program was going to be fully funded after four years. Since this is Year 4, that should mean they are giving 12.6 scholarships at this point. There were also reports that High Point's program would be fully funded - but I can't find a credible confirmation.

The AD is part of the problem..Ski is a nice guy ... we need a tough coach who won't take any BS...just like the coaches at BU High Point Richmond and Marquette ....those coaches have a reputation for being hard asses...but they win games

The AD is part of the problem..Ski is a nice guy ... we need a tough coach who won't take any BS...just like the coaches at BU High Point Richmond and Marquette ....those coaches have a reputation for being hard asses...but they win games

We need an AD that will advocate for athletics instead of being a nodding head in the background. The question will be of course will Lafayette allow that. Any change at AD should and must include a change in the reporting structure. That will demonstrate to everyone that this is real change. Anything else is rearranging the deck chairs as the saying goes!!

No, changing the coach is pointless!!

Posted: Tue Mar 08, 2016 10:56 am

laxdad

Joined: 26 Sep 2013
Posts: 64

BS on replacing Ski. My son plays on the team and their effort against Army was lacking. If you watched the Lehigh or Bucknell games last year, the same team did not take the field against Army. Ski is a good coach and is tough on the kids. The Army loss can be attributed to a lack of effort by the players. We are still a young team and it shows.

Posted: Tue Mar 08, 2016 11:13 am

pards4ever

Joined: 20 Jul 2013
Posts: 135

Laxdad... My son also plays on this team.... Last years team was not the same as Army's... No Bock Westby Orazetti Round Sherley... And stop making excuses about how young we are... Go look at the other new programs rosters...they are all young!!!

Laxdad... My son also plays on this team.... Last years team was not the same as Army's... No Bock Westby Orazetti Round Sherley... And stop making excuses about how young we are... Go look at the other new programs rosters...they are all young!!!

Still a lack of effort. Be it because of desire or youth, the boys can play better.

Posted: Tue Mar 08, 2016 11:37 am

pards4ever

Joined: 20 Jul 2013
Posts: 135

We need a big win today!!! That would help our confidence in a big way

Posted: Tue Mar 08, 2016 12:03 pm

pardfan

Joined: 07 Sep 2014
Posts: 405

At least two coaches (from other sports) should be shown the door before Ski. Ski's got guys from Conestoga, Deerfield, Haverford..(Even if they're not the best players on those teams, those types of players are at least giving us a look.) The guy must be recruiting his butt off. He stays.

What I don't get..... Bruce stays but Ski goes? Have we all lost our marbles?

ONE DECISION would take the heat off of almost everybody connected with the school. Get rid of Bruce and only the coaches would have the worries.
(Coaches, get competitive and you have no worries.) University of Illinois just axed their AD and the new one immediately got rid of the football coach--who had just completed his first year and had recently been given a two yr extension. The new AD hires Lovie Smith and gives him $21 mln for 6 yrs plus incentives. (I wouldn't give Lovie $2.10; but, that's a topic for another day.) The point is: Someone at the top saw a problem and took bold action. That's what is needed. As Lincoln said to McClellan: "...you must act." Alison, get moving on this. Time's awastin'

Ponder this: Don't we owe it to the other League members to be way more competitive?
We brag about being in a league with them; but, I'm sure they don't brag about being in a league with us.

Posted: Tue Mar 08, 2016 12:41 pm

seenalot

Joined: 24 Feb 2007
Posts: 1424

To your ponder point, I don't think we owe them anything, nor do they owe us anything. But your second sentence, in terms of athletics, is spot on.

Posted: Tue Mar 08, 2016 12:52 pm

ed65

Joined: 04 Sep 2013
Posts: 885

Location: New York City

All good comments: The most salient point is the dissatisfaction with the AD. Sometimes symbolism is important - at least that is what the group seems to be saying. The college needs to show the alumni base and the players, parents, fans etc that the school cares about excellence e.g. WINNING. The priorities now seem to academic All Americans and budgets. I would add WINNING should lead that priority list. And I would add that the AD needs to report to the President.

That ties in with all the other reports on Boston U. All indications are that they will be fully funded (I.e. 12.6 scholarships) as of this coming fall.

137, do you have a breakdown of lacrosse scholarships in the PL, by school?

Posted: Tue Mar 08, 2016 4:10 pm

RichH

Joined: 24 Feb 2007
Posts: 1211

137 did post some info n lax funding in PL a while back. He is the best sourve. From what I recall Bucknell only has a couple of schollies. Lehigh is fully funded. Guess Loyola is also. No idea on the rest.

137 did post some info n lax funding in PL a while back. He is the best sourve. From what I recall Bucknell only has a couple of schollies. Lehigh is fully funded. Guess Loyola is also. No idea on the rest.

I don't have exact numbers, but my understanding is that Loyola and Lehigh are fully funded, and that Boston U will be fully funded by next semester. Colgate is close to being fully funded as well but not quite there. As I understand it, both LC and HC now have at least a few scholarships - maybe four - but my only source for those two is various posters on PL boards and laxpower. And Bucknell, unless something has changed in the last few months, has less than one.